Hypothesis 1 suggests that firms following
a LCS experience higher performance. Results shown in Table 1, Model 1, provide marginal
support for this hypothesis. The regression coefficient for
the LCS was statistically significant at p<.10.
Hypothesis 2 suggests that a HQS also has a positive effect on
firm performance. Again, results shown in Model 1 provide
marginal support for this hypothesis. The regression
coefficient for a HQS is statistically significant at
p<.10. Hypothesis 3 does not receive support,
however. There is no statistically significant relationship
between the use of a TBS and performance. The results in
Model 2 show that all three types of competitive actions used to
demonstrate the firms timing for implementing new products
to the marketplace are positively related to ROS (the regression
coefficients are all statistically significant at
p<.05). The addition of the implementation approaches to
the model produces a statistically significant increase in R2 and
they explain more variance in performance than the competitive
strategies.

Because of the small number of respondents
employing lowcost strategies and the small number using the
late followers approach to competitive actions, there were
no firms utilizing this combination. Thus, we could not
enter all three interactions of the LCS with the three
implementation approaches as shown by intended competitive
actions in the same model because it would create a singular
matrix. As a result, we entered them individually; as noted
in the table, no interaction was statistically significant (see
models 3, 4, and 5). These results support Hypothesis
4. Care must be taken interpreting these findings, however,
because of the small number of firms in each cell.

As shown in Model 6, all three of the
interactions between the HQS and the implementation approaches
are statistically significant, but they all are negatively
related to firm performance. Therefore, Hypothesis 5 is not
supported. The results related to Hypothesis 6 are
presented in Model 7. As shown, none of the interaction
effects are statistically significant; therefore, they do not
support the hypothesis. In summary, the overall results
provide support for three of the hypotheses (Hypothesis 1, 2, and
4) and do not provide support for the other three hypotheses
(Hypothesis 3, 5, and 6). These results, and their
implications, are discussed next.